This is the first time I've ever re-posted anything here on this blog, but for some reason this rant I wrote several months ago touched a nerve with a couple of readers, so I thought I'd throw it back up with all comments in the post and see what happens...
Cultural elitism and snobbery are taken to new levels at against pop, a website that purports, in an extremely wordy manner, to make a "case against pop & rock" music.
I've always been more amused than appalled by those who think their personal tastes in music are intrinsically superior by virtue of the complexity of the style of music they prefer. Lots of jazz fans are like that, turning their nose up at conventional pop & rock (don't even mention country) because of the relative simplicity involved in the composition and performance of those types of music compared to jazz. Indeed, it does require significantly more technical skill ("chops") to play jazz than your typical pop/rock song (though I would posit that the very best pop/rock musicians in the field can hold their own with any jazz-bo).
Then again, I've met people who are classical music snobs who feel the same way about jazz as jazz snobs feel about pop/rock. For whatever reason, jazz just doesn't rise to their standards...perhaps it's the loose, relatively unstructured nature of the music (as compared to classical), or maybe it's the focus on improvisation that bugs 'em. I dunno (although I'm sure the site administrators for against pop could educate us, since they appear to fall into the "classical snob" camp).
Classical snobs do tend to be a tad more uppity than jazz snobs, at least that has been the impression I've noticed. I'll never forget an incident that occurred when I was working at CD Warehouse a few years ago. I was playing a George Strait CD on the store's stereo, as I liked to mix it up quite a bit and play all different kinds of music. There was a lady who had come in the store and had spent all her time there in the classical section. She eventually came to the counter and purchased a CD, but she had this disgusted look on her face. She said, "How can you stand to listen to that stuff? That's not music!"
"I dunno", I answered, "I guess it's because I like it".
And there, in a nutshell, is why all the high-falutin' arguments purporting ANY style of music's superiority over another (case-in-point: against pop) are futile execises in pompous elitism that not only will never change anyone's mind but come off as laughable.
People listen to whatever kind of music they listen to BECAUSE THEY LIKE IT...because it sounds good to them. Most people could care less about the virtuosity required to produce a piece of music, and that's just fine because virtuosity itself is not necesarilly a requirement for a song to have the ability to touch someone, to move them to whatever extremes of emotion it aims for, and so on.
For instance, a simple Nick Drake song, to my ears, is every bit as moving as Samuel Barber's Adagio, which is, in it's choral version, my favorite classical composition. Why? How should I know? It just is...it just has that power over my emotions, the sound of his voice, the feeling he puts into his singing, maybe even the simplicity of the song itself culminates in a response that is every bit as musically satisfying as that provided by the most complicated, yet beautiful piece of classical music I've ever heard.
At any rate, it seems to me to be a futile gesture and a waste of time and energy to make such a case against any genre of music in the way that against pop does with pop/rock. We're going to listen to what we enjoy listening to, and that is all there is to it, whether it's a lame Britney Spears song on the radio or an old recording of Maria Callas singing a Verdi aria. And why should those of us who enjoy the sound of a good, distortion drenched, guitar heavy rock and roll song every once in a while CARE about what anyone thinks?
The philosophy of the classical snob, the jazz snob, the snob that thinks ANY kind of music is superior to all others is the antithesis of my own philosophy about music, which is summed up in the ancient adage, "Variety is the spice of life". Indeed, I would have been burned out on music years ago if I only listened to one genre. I'll concede that at this point in my life I listen to more classical music than any other kind. But I'll never become one of the snobs who rejects all other forms of musical expression.
Fer cryin' out loud, listening to Autechre has helped me get a firmer grip on classical, ifn' you can believe that.
And now the comments:
Anonymous said...
Well, I suppose you have a point, but I have visited the site "against pop", and it seems to me that you haven't answered any of the detailed arguments on that site. Although I tend to agree with you, you need to do better than this against a site with the sophistication that that site demonstrates - the agruments are amazing, and, sadly, convincing!
To which I replied...
"Answering the detailed arguments" on the "against pop" site would require more time and energy than I am willing to expend (or I should say, than I was willing/able to expend back when I made this post...it's kinda old). I appreciate your comment...at least I made my point, eh? Who knows but maybe someday I will find myself in a position where I am able to invest the necessary effort required to counter such a "sophisticated" site...
In the meantime, I'll just listen to whatever sounds good to my ears...guilt-free.
Sekais said...
I don't think of myself as a snob. I merely lament the fact that Beethoven, Liszt, Bach, et al. worked their hardest to produce great music and now they are being forgotten for musicians with significantly less talent. It is a tragedy that such great art is being plowed under by the likes of Britney Spears and 50 Cent.
I simply find it appalling that whether you are profitable to modern capitalism is more important than how much talent you have. I believe that hard work, skill, and ability should be valued over "cool" electronic effects and trendy nonsense. I refuse to consider Michael Jackson my superior. If that makes me a snob, then so be it.
To which I replied...
I don't think Beethoven, Liszt, Bach etc. are "being forgotten for musicians with significantly less talent"...Classical music has endured and will continue to endure because it is the very essence of music itself. The true music lover will eventually gravitate towards the more sophisticated compositions in the course of time, even if only to "keep it fresh", and once the mind is opened to symphonic/chamber/classical music then the sky is the limit, because you've passed from the realm of "the riff" and "the gimmick" into the undiluted anatomy of the art form itself.
But that assumes that all pop music is chiefly "riff & gimmick"...perhaps I should point out that my rant in this post was not meant to be taken as a defense for acts like Britney Spears or Michael Jackson, or any of a number of disposable "pop sensations" that seem to have no artistic purpose and are, in Sekais words, simply "profitable to modern capitalism". It doesn't make you a snob to dismiss Michael Jackson...it just shows that you recognize the difference between "celebrity" and "artist".
My post was certainly not meant to denigrate classical music and/or the constituency of classical music fans, of which I am definately firmly entrenched. Honestly, classical music is probably my favorite kind of music and Mozart, Beethoven, Mahler, Gorecki, Taverner (the list goes on and on) etc. are at the very top of my list of preferences...and yet, I love to listen to a steel guitar saturated honky tonk song from the late 50's. I dig vocal classical music, and I'm of the opinion that the choral arrangement of Samuel Barber's Adagio For Strings (the Agnus Dei) is some of the most heavenly music on earth...but it keeps company in that high esteem with Sigur Ros' Takk, which is also almost painfully beautiful.
The point being that when someone decides that the kind of music they prefer is superior to any other kind of music, they shut themselves off from potentially appreciating music that can be every bit as emotionally stirring, thought-provoking/mentally stimulating and/or just plain enjoyable. And that is what it all comes down to, right? I mean, if you're listening to music for any other reason than because it's an enjoyable pasttime then I don't know that I could understand that mindset well enough to even attempt to communicate with it.
When I visited the "Against Pop" website (and I admit, it's been awhile) I was struck by what looked to me like a blanket definition of ALL non-classical music as "pop" (which would mean not only Justin Timberlake but Peter Gabriel as well), and a wholesale negative criticism of all that fell under that umbrella in relation to an almost fanatical devotion to classical, which they had elevated to the status of being the only kind of music that an intelligent person should listen to. That's what irked me and prompted the "music snob" quip. What looked to be a stubborn refusal to embrace a "Different strokes for different folks" bottom line, and not only that but a dismissal of those of us who happen to have an appreciation for non-classical forms of music which reveals itself in the form of a lot of psychobabble about WHY classical music is inherantly superior to any other style. The anonymous commenter to this post apparently finds all that gobble-dee-gook convincing, but I ain't buying it.
Postscript:
I also feel the need to point this out: when I wrote "We're going to listen to what we enjoy listening to, and that is all there is to it, whether it's a lame Britney Spears song on the radio or an old recording of Maria Callas singing a Verdi aria" I WAS PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE to an extreme. I hope noone gets the impression that I prefer Spears to Callas (or that I would even waste 30 seconds of my time listening to a Britney Spears song)...the music I really like is proclaimed right there on the right side of your screen, and at the risk of sounding snobbish myself, I shudder at the thought of a Smash Mouth or an NSync within those ranks.
No comments:
Post a Comment